Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Techzonez


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was delete.  Grue  14:41, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Techzonez
Advertising. Watched the original article develop and talked to user about avoiding advertising, but it remains too near the knuckle. Also, non-notable: visited the site and nothing, to me, stands out as encyclopedic ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 23:06, 3 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep petard I use this all the time.  And I refer many others to the site to contribute and learn from as well.  The site if full of Information Technology current events, helpful tips for computer users, a forum for the valued exchange of ideas and information, and a documented resource on many similar Internet sites.  Removing a valued resource just doesn't make sense. (Note: This is this user (contribs) has only edited here. - ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 16:50, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Think its all chat? Look again. Lots of info on how to fix computers as problems arise. I myself have gotten some of my computer hardware fixed by looking about the forums. Usually the first few posts are what you want, the rest is chat making it easy to read for information. Also the frequent members are well versed in all aspects of computing, sure a place to find help and information. (Note: This is this user's (contribs) first edit. - Dalbury (talk) 11:34, 7 November 2005 (UTC)}
 * Delete as per nom, obviously. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 23:09, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The web site is elaborate, but it's a news and chat site, and nothing special. - Dalbury 01:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)) (Dehcbad25 03:22, 5 November 2005 (UTC)Dalbury, I strongly suggest that you take a look at the page before saying there is nothing special. The front page is a news page, and in the forum might be lots of chat, but from regular users that keep it running. The point where the site becomes great value, is for the inexperienced web/computer user that is requesting help. I had seem lots of users that looked lost, but ended feeling welcome in the site, and resolved their computer related problems. It also has a lot of sections that keep information accessible for users. If the original article was biased, I think it can be corrected, and it should not be very difficult to do.
 * Comment to Dehcbad - I did look at the site. I have spent the past 5 years as a SysOp in support forums for a major software company, so I know something about helping users.  It's very nice that you are helping novice users, but that does not make the Web site deserving of an article in Wikipedia. - Dalbury  (contribs) 03:34, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. Ads. *drew 04:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Jangleleggs It is as informative as neowin, digg, or slashdot. The site was listed on the Microsoft Expert Zone, provides free technical support to any and all, and has been a bastion to new users who need technical advice on computing issues. (preceding unsigned comment by 220.107.57.190 (talk • contribs) )  (The only edits by this user have been in this discussion. - Dalbury 02:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC))
 * Keep beelzebub Techzonez is an important knowledge base that provides assistance for most computing problems. It has been qouted on slashdot, and it is important that people know about this forum; where even the most basic computer user can find easily understandable assistance without sarcasm or insult. (The only edits by this user have been in this discussion. - *drew 02:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC))
 * Keep MadMonitor Many of the threads are short problem and solutions type and it seems they have a growning list of people willing to learn. I think the website is a good addition here.
 * Keep (preceding unsigned comment by 70.191.207.24 (talk • contribs) )
 * Keep As I wrote the site, I am a vested interest. Feel free to disregard my vote, however as Redver is also an interested party, I think that nullifies his vote. BigBooger (contribs)
 * That's bad logic. I offered you advice on trying to stop the article from looking like advertising. That hardly makes me an "interested party", now, does it? ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 11:00, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * You cite bad logic. It was you who called the site a "advertisement" from the beginning. Then you write this: "I'm pleased that, following the placement of the tag, your next edits cleaned up the article somewhat, replacing the "our" and "we" with "their" and "they", which is a great improvement." Then the following day you try to delete the page. Logic dictates that you call it a "GREAT IMPROVEMENT" and then you try to delete the site, means one of two things, you are confused or you've gone the way of the darkside. (This comment by User:Big Booger was lost when I was trying to save an edit, and kept getting server connection errors, so I am manually resoring it. - Dalbury 13:48, 5 November 2005 (UTC))
 * I did indeed call the article an advertisement from early on. You or own of your puppets removed the tag immediately I put it on. Your selective quoting of me is interesting: to selectively quote myself from your quote, I'm pleased that, following the placement of the tag, your next edits cleaned up the article somewhat - note the last word.I then went away and allowed time for the article to be improved more than somewhat. This didn't happen: it was obviously just advertising and obviously had no encyclopedial merit or notability, as stated in the guidelines - which are prominently linked from all over the Wikipedia and where very clearly linked from the advertising tag you (or puppets of you) deleted. I'm sorry you don't agree with the listing of your article here, but the idea of listing here is to gain a consensus of Wikipedia community members. That consensus may have proved me wrong - a decision I would accept without question. But I fear that now we will never know. Sorry. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 14:03, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Useful info Ak7767 (contribs)
 * Keep This is a GREAT resource for me! KEEP THIS PLEASE! Denyse (contribs)
 * KeepPlease keep this entry. It will help Wikipedia users. I am not biased because I am a member of Techzonez, it really does deserve an entry on Wikipedia, which much also document troubleshooting, forums and cyberculture. Bottom line is that end-users of wikipedia will in no way consider the quality of wikipedia to have decreased upon reading this entry. On the contrary, how many similar projects offer such entries on web communities?Tarun88 (contribs)
 * Keep Dehcbad25 (contribs) 03:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC) Before I get labeled that this is the only page I edit, I have to point I never had the necessity to edit, nor I am good at it. I have used wikipedia countless times, but as many users I come here to learn a topic, so I am in no condition to edit an article, since I am learning the topic. In this case I do know about it. I am a member of the forum, but I don't think my vote should be discarded, because I can discuss about the forum knowing very well about it. If you think that the article should be deleted, take a look around the forum itself. Hardware and Software sections have lots of post requesting help. Tips and tweaks I believe is a noteworthy section where you can find a large list of tips and tweaks.
 * Comment We mark first-time users in these discussions so that the Administrators can more easily determine which votes to count. It is Wikipedia policy that unsigned votes and votes from brand-new, single-purpose users do not count.  Please read the policy at Sock puppet. - Dalbury 03:56, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * KeeptzefcI am another contributer at Techzonez. I have found it interesting to read the "delete" comments.  These people obviously don't need the kind of help we offer.  We are the place that a new user can come and find prompt and usually good technical advice.  The atmosphere is always polite.  No one will ever be humilated because they don't how to solve a simple problem.  While there are many topics at Techzonez, the core reason for the site is tech support.  Obviously I think it provides a needed service to have stayed around for more than three years. (This is this user's (who is registered as "Efctz", not "tzefc") first edit. - Dalbury 08:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC))
 * KeepTechzonez deserves to have a Wikipedia article. I have been a member of the forum for over a year now and can say without a doubt that it is the best tech support forum on the net. Better than the likes of MSFN and Neowin- because the people there are polite and ensure that questions are answered no matter what. The sheer number of questions that have been answered by the members of the community makes Techzonez one of the largest searchable databases of tech support questions on the internet. Also note that Techzonez is not 'just another tech forum'. It has been listed on Microsoft's Expert Zone in the past.Rohitk89 06:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC) (This is this user's first edit. - Dalbury 08:36, 5 November 2005 (UTC)) Moreover, this article is a result of the sole efforts of BigBooger- a Techzonez administrator who makes no revenue from it (the forum is owned by ‘Reverend’).Rohitk89 09:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. I have restored a comment that I attached to this edit, and which was then deleted by User:Rohitk89. - Dalbury 12:10, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Sock puppet brigade are out in force on this one, making the real consensus difficult to spot. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 10:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Further complicated by many editors not signing their edits correctly. - Dalbury 12:56, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I find it folly that you post this, and then expect users of Techzonez to ignore it... Honestly, is that fair? You asked to vote on it, and now vested members who use Wikipedia and Techzonez are voting.. then you call sock puppetry?  What kind of logic is that?  Because they are members of Techzonez does that make their vote less worthy and yours more worthy?user:BigBooger 9:33, 5 November 2005 (UTC) BigBooger is actually User:Big Booger - Dalbury 12:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Have your read the sock puppet policy? The invitation to vote on nominations for deletion is to members of the Wikipedia community. Editors who are not logged in, or who have created new accounts for the purpose of voting on an article's nomination for deletion, are not deemed to be members of the Wikipedia community for purposes of voting.  Otherwise, the real consensus can be overwhelmed by a special interest group with no prior participation in Wikipedia. - Dalbury 12:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete advertising and supported by too many apparant socks Trödel| talk 13:01, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep tzrev i am the owner of Techzonez and rather than this discussion turning into the tit for tat argument that it has developed into,can redvers or anyone else who wants our wiki removed please explain what content you consider should be edited or deleted. If it doesn't conform to wiki guidelines please be more specific about the recommendations you require. That is all i ask.Thanks.
 * One other thing,i've looked at some other tech sites wikis,(neowin and slashdot as examples),and to be honest their content appears to be a similar theme to ours,so why does theirs meet the requirements but our does not? BTW that comment is not aimed directly at those sites above,(i consider us to have a good relationship with both of them),my gripe is with those who wish to see us deleted.
 * Like i say i'm not here to flame,i just want clarification on what content is acceptable and what content is not. Thanks

A related issue occurs when non-Wikipedians create new accounts specifically to influence a  particular vote or discussion. This is especially common in deletion discussions. These newly created accounts (or anonymous edits) may be friends of a Wikipedian, or may be related in some way to the subject of an article under discussion. These accounts are not actually sockpuppets, but they are difficult to distinguish from real sockpuppets and are treated similarly. Neither a sockpuppet nor a brand-new, single-purpose account holder is a member of the Wikipedia community. The reason behind this is, for instance, that an article about an online community should not be kept merely because all members of that community show up to vote for it. The Arbitration Committee has ruled that, for the purpose of dispute resolution, when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sockpuppets or several users with similar editing habits they may be treated as one user with sockpuppets.
 * I'd advise, again, a read of What Wikipedia is NOT and also a read of WP:N. Plus you may like to do a search for advertising and read up on the subject if you don't know what it is or isn't. And can you ask your metapuppets to please start signing their 'contributions' with ~ as they're not helping us to read this thread and thus seriously damaging the arguments you are trying to make? Thanks! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 13:43, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Dalbury, do you know what a sock puppet is? I'm sure you've spent god a lot of time here at Wikipedia and yet you keep rambling on without making much sense. Let me clarify. A sock puppet is "A sock puppet is an additional username used by a Wikipedian who edits under more than one name. The Wikipedian who uses a sock puppet may be called a sock puppeteer." All the voters against the deletion of this article are genuine members of the Wikipedia community, albeit first time users/first time editors. Secondly, why must we take down this article and why can neowin and slashdot stay up?
 * Comment. Did you read all of the sock puppet policy page?  The last section, "Meat puppets", says:


 * As for your second question, Slashdot is certainly much better known than Techzonez. I'm not familiar with Neowin, nor with any discussions about it that may have occurred within Wikipedia - Dalbury 14:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Neowin is a tech forum like Techzonez. Like I said 12,890 users do not constitute a 'narrow interest group'. Your problem is that it sounds like an advertisement, we have edit it to conform to Wikipedia standards. What's the fuss about now?Rohitk89


 * @Redvers: they are not metapuppets. How hard is that to get? They are just first time users having difficulties getting used to the way things work here.59.93.75.61 14:02, 5 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment If you scroll down the page on sockpuppets you'll find a definition of metapuppets. ➨ ❝REDVERS</b>❞ 14:06, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment What about the other question? Must we delete the article or simply edit it so as to prevent it from appearing like an advertisment? What if we remove all links directed to TZ? Also 12,890 people do not constitute a 'narrow interest group'.Rohit 15:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, please edit the article so it is no longer an advertisement. Also, please prove notability. And 12,890 people, in terms of internet reach, is exactly what I'd define as a narrow interest group. Have you thought of listing your webpage with The Open Directory Project instead of inserting it into an encyclopedia? ➨ ❝<b style="color:red;">REDVERS</b>❞ 16:06, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I've found Techzonez a helpful guide to my baka computer problems and therefore it's a valuable resource of information when it's edited into wiki-style information. It's important that such help.information is recycled to the general public---the Wikipedia is the perfect venue for this. (contribs - Editor's first edit was earlier today. - Dalbury 16:31, 5 November 2005 (UTC))
 * Comment REDVERS,i have now extensively edited the article. Please take a look and let me know if there are any further edits you require. Thanks.
 * Comment Replied on the article's talk page. Please sign your contributions here using ~ as this is good manners.  ➨ ❝<b style="color:red;">REDVERS</b>❞ 22:10, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment regarding your comment on the talk page,and i quote "Your quest for a Google rank is understandable, but doing it here is downright pathetic.?" we hardly need to improve our google ranking,its fine as it is thank you. You've clearly got some other underlying reason for opposing our wiki,rather than just the content. Anyway,delete away if it gives you a buzz. We innocently set up the wiki as a form of information,unfortunately you are too far up your own arse to see that. Oh and btw,you mentioned good manners in your previous reply,obviously no one told you its considered rude to use all capital letters in your username. Kind Regards from one "non-notable" site owner to another. <b style="color:red;">tzrev</b>
 * Comment Grow up ➨ ❝<b style="color:red;">REDVERS</b>❞ 23:38, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment That's rich coming from you. Put your dummy back in. <b style="color:red;">tzrev</b>
 * Comment I repeat: No personal attacks. Thank you. ➨ ❝<b style="color:red;">REDVERS</b>❞ 23:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment You made it personal with your attitude. <b style="color:red;">tzrev</b>
 * Comment' This dialogue has become unproductive and I suggest all parties now withdraw from it. If you have further comments to make, please take them to Requests for Arbitration ➨ ❝<b style="color:red;">REDVERS</b>❞ 23:57, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment The article has been extensively edited, Redvers. Are there still any issues other than the one concerning notability?Rohit 02:04, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete - this is seriously ridiculous and a waste of the time and effort of good users. Abeo Paliurus 02:31, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unabashed advertising. Pete.Hurd 18:50, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Techzonez is a great place for sharing knowledge about computers and technologies in general, reading news, solving PC-related problems and discussing about a lot of arguments. It's a reference for a lot of people, so I think it's good that TZ is included in Wikipedia. Carletto 08:47, 7 November 2005 (UTC) (Note: This is this user's (contribs) first edit. - Dalbury (talk) 10:20, 7 November 2005 (UTC)}


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.